Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Election/Restrictions
Claims 9-22 are selected with claims 1-8 are withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b) as being drawn to a nonelected invention, there being no allowable generic or linking claim. Election was made without traverse in the reply filed on 14 February 2026.
Priority
Acknowledgment is made of applicant's claim for foreign priority based on an application filed in People’s Republic of China on 28 January 2021. It is noted, however, that applicant has not filed a certified copy of the CN202110116612.7 application as required by 37 CFR 1.55.
Claim Objections
Claims 20 and 22 are objected to because of the following informalities:
Claim 20 object to “the electronic device having a microphone” is read as “the electronic device having the microphone”
Claim 22 object to “PETT” read as “ PETT (polyethylene terephthalate-polypropylene terephthalate copolyester)”
Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b):
(b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph:
The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention.
Claims 12-13, 19, and 21-22 rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention.
Claim 12 recites the limitation “the pickup hole” in line 4. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. For examining purposes, “the pickup hole” is read as “a pickup hole”
Claim 13 and similarly 22 recites the following “porous bulky material has a characteristic impedance that varies from layer to layer, in the direction from the central cavity of the external sound channel to the PCB board”. It is unclear to which “layer to layer” the claims refer to; such as, if the “porous bulk material” has a plurality of layers with differing impedance or describing an impedance change through the internal sound channel’s length. For examining purposes, “porous bulky material has a characteristic impedance that varies from layer to layer in the direction from the central cavity of the external sound channel to the PCB board” will be read as “porous bulky material has a characteristic impedance that varies
Claim 19 recites the limitations “the PCB board”, “the arc cover”, “the internal sound chamber”, “the central cavity”. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. For examining purpose, “the PCB board”, “the arc cover”, “the internal sound chamber”, “the central cavity” are read as “a PCB board”, “an arc cover”, “an internal sound chamber” and “a central cavity”
Claim 21 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ) as being dependent upon claim 13.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 101
35 U.S.C. 101 reads as follows:
Whoever invents or discovers any new and useful process, machine, manufacture, or composition of matter, or any new and useful improvement thereof, may obtain a patent therefor, subject to the conditions and requirements of this title.
Claim 20 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 because the claimed invention is directed to non-statutory subject matter. The claim(s) does/do not fall within at least one of the four categories of patent eligible subject matter because the claim is directed towards “use of the device” and not a process, machine, manufacture, or composition of matter.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made.
Claim(s) 9-10, and 12 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over De Pooter et al. (US 8,009,851).
Regarding Claim 9, De Pooter et al. (US 8,009,851) discloses a device capable of reducing wind noise, comprising a body, an arc cover and a PCB board (Body A with arc cover 26 and PCB 36; Col. 4, Lines 1-7; Col. 8, Lines 25-32; Fig. 7, Examiner Annotated De Pooter Fig. 9);
wherein the body is a tubular structure, one end of the body is connected to the PCB board, and the other end is connected to the arc cover, and an internal sound channel is arranged inside the body along the central axis (In Examiner Annotated De Pooter Fig. 9: Body A shown tubular with end B connected to PCB through microphone 22 (Col. 5, Lines 13-17; Fig. 2) and other end C connected to arc cover 26. Internal sound channel 44 along central axis A2; Fig. 9);
an external sound channel is arranged inside the arc cover along the horizontal direction, and the external sound channel, including a central cavity and several branch channels arranged in a radial pattern around the central cavity, wherein the central cavity communicates with the internal sound channel (External sound channel with central cavity 24 and branch channels 28 radial about central cavity 24 wherein 24 communicates with internal sound channel 44; leading portion of branch channel 28 may be provided at ninety degrees/horizontal to axis A2; Col. 8, Lines 1-26; Fig. 9-10).
PNG
media_image1.png
505
653
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Examiner Annotated De Pooter Fig. 9
De Pooter et al. fails to explicitly disclose the external sound channel (External sound channel with central cavity 24 and branch channels 28; Fig. 9) has a pinwheel-like structure as a whole, and each branch channel is a streamlined arc structure. However, this would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, since it has been held by the courts that a change in shape or configuration, without any criticality, is nothing more than one of numerous shapes that one of ordinary skill in the art will find obvious to provide based on the suitability for the intended final application. See In re Dailey, 149 USPQ 47 (CCPA 1976). It appears that the disclosed device would perform equally well shaped as disclosed by De Pooter al.
Regarding Claim 10, De Pooter et al. discloses the device capable of reducing wind noise according to claim 9, wherein the branch channels of the external sound channel are evenly distributed around the central cavity (Follows as branch channels 28 described as “substantially symmetric about axis A2” and central cavity 24 is also symmetric about A2; Col. 8, Lines 25-40; Fig. 9).
De Pooter et al. fails to explicitly disclose the diameter of each branch channel in the external sound channel (28) gradually decreases from the outside to the inside of the device. However, this would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention for the purpose of reducing noise within a particular range, since such a modification would have involved a mere change in the size of a component. A change in size is generally recognized as being within the level of ordinary skill in the art. In re Rose, 105 USPQ 237 (CCPA 1955).
Regarding Claim 12, De Pooter et al. discloses the device according to claim 9. De Pooter et al. fails to explicitly disclose wherein the diameter of the port of the internal sound channel on the side close to the external sound channel matches the diameter of the central cavity (Diameter of 44 towards 28 compared to diameter of central cavity 24; Fig. 9); the diameter of the port of the internal sound channel on the side close to the PCB board is greater than or equal to the diameter of the pickup hole (“the pickup hole” read as “a pickup hole”. Diameter of 44 towards 22 compared to diameter pickup hole 46; Fig. 9. PCB board 36 of Fig. 7 is not shown, but is behind microphone 22). However, this would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention for the purpose of optimizing sound pressure to the microphone, since it has been held that where the general conditions of a claim are disclosed in the prior art, discovering the optimum or working range involves only routine skill in the art. In re Aller, 105 USPQ 233.
Claim(s) 11 and 20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over De Pooter et al. (US 8,009,851)) in view Lu et a. (See translation of WO 2022/048395 A1).
Regarding Claim 11, De Pooter et al. discloses the device according to claim 9. De Pooter et al. fails to explicitly disclose wherein the center of the PCB board (36; Fig. 7) is provided with a pickup hole which communicates with the internal sound channel (Beneath microphone 22, pickup hole 46 communicates with internal sound channel 44 in Fig. 9. PCB board 36 of Fig. 7 is not shown, but is behind microphone 22); and the horizontal section of the internal sound channel is circular in shape; the axial section of the internal sound channel is rectangular or trapezoidal in shape (In Fig. 9: Internal sound channel 44 along horizontal section perpendicular to A2 and axial along A2);
However, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, wherein the horizontal section of the internal sound channel is circular in shape, since it has been held by the courts that a change in shape or configuration, without any criticality, is nothing more than one of numerous shapes that one of ordinary skill in the art will find obvious to provide based on the suitability for the intended final application. See In re Dailey, 149 USPQ 47 (CCPA 1976). It appears that the disclosed device would perform equally well shaped as disclosed by De Pooter al.
Moreover, Lu et al. (WO 2022/048395 A1) teaches wherein the center of the PCB board is provided with a pickup hole which communicates with the internal sound channel (Lu: Center of PCB board 5 with pickup hole 2522 communicates with internal sound channel 2521; Para. 0069,0071 Fig. 4); and the horizontal section of the internal sound channel is circular in shape; the axial section of the internal sound channel is rectangular or trapezoidal in shape (In structure of Lu: 2521 described as tube, circular along horizontal section and rectangular along axial section; Para. 0071; Fig. 4). Lu et al. and De Pooter et al. are in similar fields comprising noise reducing headsets. Modifying De Pooter et al. with teachings of Lu et al. would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention wherein the center of the PCB board is provided with a pickup hole which communicates with the internal sound channel for the purpose of communicating a microphone interior to the PCB board with outside of the electronic device’s housing and wherein the horizontal section of the internal sound channel is circular in shape and the axial section of the internal sound channel is rectangular or trapezoidal in shape since it has been held by the courts that a change in shape or configuration, without any criticality, is nothing more than one of numerous shapes that one of ordinary skill in the art will find obvious to provide based on the suitability for the intended final application. See In re Dailey, 149 USPQ 47 (CCPA 1976). It appears that the disclosed device would perform equally well shaped as disclosed by Lu et al.
Regarding Claim 20, De Pooter et al. (US 8,009,851) discloses use of the device capable of reducing wind noise according to any one of claim 9 in an electronic device having a microphone; the electronic device having a microphone (Device 20 with microphone 22 reduces wind noise; Col. 4, Lines 10-36; Fig. 9). De Pooter et al. fails to explicitly disclose the microphone (22; Fig. 9) includes a TWS earphone.
However, Lu et a. (WO 2022/048395 A1) teaches the microphone includes a TWS earphone (Lu: Para. 0057). Lu et al. and De Pooter et al. are in similar fields comprising noise reducing headsets. Modifying De Pooter et al. with teachings of Lu et al. would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention wherein the microphone includes a TWS earphone for the purpose of eliminating wired connections (Lu: Para. 0057).
Claim(s) 13 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over De Pooter et al. (US 8,009,851) in view of Chen et al. (See translation of CN-110104990-A) and Xin et al. (See translation of CN 109707060A).
Regarding Claim 13, De Pooter et al. discloses the device according to claim 9. De Pooter et al. fails to explicitly disclose: wherein a porous bulky material is filled in the internal sound channel (Porous material filled in external sound channel 28 instead of internal sound channel 44; Col. 5, Lines 45-67; Fig. 9);
raw material of the porous bulky material comprises zeolite, an adhesive and a dispersant, wherein the mass of the solid component of the adhesive is 1% to 20% of the mass of the zeolite, and the mass of the dispersant is 1% to 3% of the mass of the zeolite;
the porous bulky material has a characteristic impedance that varies from layer to layer, in the direction from the central cavity (24; Fig. 9) of the external sound channel to the PCB board (36; Fig. 7);
the characteristic impedance of the porous bulky material gradually increases in the direction from the central cavity of the external sound channel to the PCB board.
However, Chen et al. (CN-110104990-A) teaches wherein a porous bulky material is filled in the internal sound channel (Chen: Sound absorbing material 32 filled in internal sound channel 12; Para. 0115; Fig. 2. Material 32 comprises porous zeolite; Para. 0128);
raw material of the porous bulky material comprises zeolite, an adhesive and a dispersant, wherein the mass of the solid component of the adhesive is 1% to 20% of the mass of the zeolite, and the mass of the dispersant is 1% to 3% of the mass of the zeolite (Chen: Ratio of zeolite weight to binder/adhesive, and additives/dispersant 40:(1 to 6):(0.2 to 1); Para. 0090,0100. The binder/adhesive with percentage rewritten as
1
41
to
6
41
is 2.439% to 13.043%. The additives are a dispersant with percentage rewritten as
0.2
40.2
to
1
41
is 0.497% to 2.439%).
Chen et al. and De Pooter et al. are in similar fields of noise reduction within electronic devices. Modifying De Pooter et al. with teachings of Chen et al. would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention wherein a porous bulky material is filled in the internal sound channel for the purpose of improving sound absorption (Chen: Para. 0137); raw material of the porous bulky material comprises zeolite, an adhesive and a dispersant, wherein the mass of the solid component of the adhesive is 1% to 20% of the mass of the zeolite, and the mass of the dispersant is 1% to 3% of the mass of the zeolite for the purpose of optimizing properties of the resulting sound-absorbing particles with zeolite being a typical used porous sound absorbing powder, an adhesive for binding when in slurry form, and dispersants to prevent clumping (Chen: Para. 0065,0007,0098,0089) since it has been held that where the general conditions of a claim are disclosed in the prior art, discovering the optimum or working range involves only routine skill in the art. In re Aller, 105 USPQ 233.
Further Xin et al. (CN 109707060A) teaches, the porous bulky material has a characteristic impedance that varies from layer to layer, in the direction from the central cavity of the external sound channel to the board (Xin: Perforated porous material 1 with diameter decreasing continuously towards backing/board 2 with continuously varying impedance; Para. 0049,0051,0054; Fig. 1); the characteristic impedance of the porous bulky material gradually increases in the direction from the central cavity of the external sound channel to the board (Xin: Follows from structure of diameter increasing).
Xin et al., Chen et al., and De Pooter et al. are in similar fields of comprising sound absorbing materials. Modifying De Pooter et al. as modified by Chen et al. with teachings of Xin et al. would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention wherein the porous bulky material has a characteristic impedance that varies from layer to layer, in the direction from the central cavity of the external sound channel to the PCB board and the characteristic impedance of the porous bulky material gradually increases in the direction from the central cavity of the external sound channel to the PCB board for the purpose of sound absorption performance at high frequencies and sound absorption peaks to appear earlier in the low-frequency range (Xin: Para. 0072).
Claim(s) 21 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over De Pooter et al. (US 8,009,851) in view of Chen et al. (CN-110104990-A), Xin et al. (CN 109707060A), and Cao et al. (See translation of CN 106162468 A).
Regarding Claim 21, De Pooter et al. as modified by Chen et al. and Xin et al. disclose the device capable of reducing wind noise according to claim 13.
De Pooter et al. as modified by Chen et al. and Xin et al. fails to explicitly disclose wherein the porous bulky material (Chen: Sound absorbing material 32 filled in internal sound channel 12; Para. 0115; Fig. 2) has a hierarchical porous structure; the porous bulky material comprises first-level pores with a pore size of 0.3 nm to 0.7 nm, second-level pores with a pore size of 10 nm to 50 nm and third-level pores with a pore size of 2 μm to 200 μm; the third-level pores include intergranular interstitial pores with a pore size of 2 μm to 10 μm and/or array macropores with a pore size of 10 μm to 200 μm; the pore volume of the intergranular interstitial pores is 1% to 5% of the pore volume of the third-level pores.
However, Cao et al. (CN 106162468 A) teaches the porous bulky material has a hierarchical porous structure (Cao: Para. 0049);
the porous bulky material comprises first-level pores with a pore size of 0.3 nm to 0.7 nm (Cao: Raw particle 11 with micropores/ first level 21 with size 0.4-0.8nm; Para. 0013-0014),
second-level pores with a pore size of 10 nm to 50 nm and third-level pores with a pore size (Cao: Mesopores/second level 22 with pore size 2-10nm overlaps with edge of claimed 10-50nm and third level 3 with pore size 2-20nm (0.002-0.2μm); Para. 0014,0047; Fig. 2);
the third-level pores include intergranular interstitial pores (Cao: Structure of third level pores 3 formed between raw particles 11 is intergranular interstitial with pore size 2-20nm (0.002-0.2μm); Para. 0047) with a pore size and/or array macropores with a pore size of 10 μm to 200 μm.
Cao et al, Xin et al., Chen et al., and De Pooter et al. are in similar fields of comprising sound absorbing materials. Modifying De Pooter et al. as modified by Chen et al. and Xin et al. with teachings of Cao et al. would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention wherein the porous bulky material has a hierarchical porous structure and the porous bulky material comprises first-level pores with a pore size of 0.3 nm to 0.7 nm; second-level pores with a pore size of 10 nm to 50 nm and third-level pores with a pore size; and the third-level pores include intergranular interstitial pores and/or array macropores with a pore size of 10 μm to 200 μm for the purpose of increasing volume within the porous bulky material while optimizing the amount of air adsorption and desired resonant frequency (Cao: Para. 0047,0049).
Modifying De Pooter et al. as modified by Chen et al., Xin et al. , and Cao et al. fail to explicitly disclose the following ranges: third-level pores with a pore size of 2 μm to 200 μm (Cao: Third level 3 with pore size 2-20nm (0.002-0.2μm) lower than claimed range; Para. 0014,0047; Fig. 2); the third-level pores include intergranular interstitial pores (Cao: Structure of third level pores 3 formed between raw particles 11 is intergranular interstitial; Para. 0047; Fig. 2) with a pore size of 2 μm to 10 μm and/or array macropores with a pore size of 10 μm to 200 μm; and the pore volume of the intergranular interstitial pores (3; Fig. 2) is 1% to 5% of the pore volume of the third-level pores. However, this would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention for the purpose of design requirements by matching selection of adhesives, the molding process, and spacing of particles (Cao: Para. 0059-0060), since it has been held that where the general conditions of a claim are disclosed in the prior art, discovering the optimum or working range involves only routine skill in the art. In re Aller, 105 USPQ 233.
Claim(s) 22 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over De Pooter et al. (US 8,009,851) in view of Chen et al. (CN-110104990-A), Xin et al. (CN 109707060A), and Mok et al. (US 20230326443 A1).
Regarding Claim 22, De Pooter et al. as modified by Chen et al. and Xin et al. discloses the device capable of reducing wind noise according to claim 13, wherein the porous bulky material is prepared by mixing the zeolite, the adhesive, and the dispersant to form a raw material suspension (Chen: Mixed to form slurry; Para. 0098).
De Pooter et al. as modified by Chen et al. and Xin et al. fails to explicitly disclose then evenly spreading the raw material suspension on fiber paper; the fiber paper includes one or a combination of two or more of polyester fiber, polyamide fiber, polyacrylonitrile fiber, polyvinyl formal fiber, and PETT fiber; the thickness of the fiber paper is 50 μm to 200 μm, and the thickness of the fiber paper loaded with the raw material suspension is 100 μm to 600 μm; the fiber paper has macropores with a pore size of 10 μm to 100 μm; the prepared porous bulky material is a material having a characteristic impedance that varies from layer to layer.
However, Mok et al. (US 20230326443 A1) teaches then evenly spreading the raw material suspension on fiber paper (Mok: Slurry coating onto nonwoven layer; Para. 0115-0119); the fiber paper includes one or a combination of two or more of polyester fiber, polyamide fiber, polyacrylonitrile fiber, polyvinyl formal fiber, and PETT fiber (Mok: Para. 0054); the prepared porous bulky material is a material having a characteristic impedance (Mok: Acoustic impedance, transfer impedance, flow resistance; Para. 0089-0094). Mok et al., Xin et al., Chen et al., and De Pooter et al. are in similar fields of comprising sound absorbing materials. Modifying De Pooter et al. as modified by Chen et al. and Xin et al. with teachings of Mok et al. would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention wherein then evenly spreading the raw material suspension on fiber; the fiber includes one or a combination of two or more of polyester fiber, polyamide fiber, polyacrylonitrile fiber, polyvinyl formal fiber, and PETT fiber; and the prepared porous bulky material is a material having a characteristic impedance for the purpose of being a common method of manufacturing multilayered acoustic articles, design requirements such as resisting degradation or shrinkage, and the transmission of sound (Mok: Para. 0117,0054-0055,0089).
De Pooter et al. as modified by Chen et al., Xin et al., and Mok et al. fail to explicitly disclose: the fiber as fiber paper; thickness of the fiber paper is 50 μm to 200 μm, and the thickness of the fiber paper loaded with the raw material suspension is 100 μm to 600 μm; the fiber paper has macropores with a pore size of (Mok: Para. 0039-0040) 10 μm to 100 μm; the prepared porous bulky material is a material having a characteristic impedance (Mok: Acoustic impedance, transfer impedance, flow resistance, Para. 0089-0094) that varies from layer to layer.
However, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention wherein the fiber as fiber paper for the purpose being a widely available material, since it has been held to be within the general skill of a worker in the art to select a known material on the basis of its suitability for the intended use as a matter of obvious design choice. In re Leshin, 125 USPQ 416.
Moreover, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention wherein thickness of the fiber paper is 50 μm to 200 μm; the thickness of the fiber paper loaded with the raw material suspension is 100 μm to 600 μm; the fiber paper has macropores with a pore size of 10 μm to 100 μm; the prepared porous bulky material is a material having a characteristic impedance that varies from layer to layer for the purpose of optimizing acoustic performance within space constraints, optimizing effective air volume, and optimizing a plurality of frequencies (Mok: Para. 0104, 0042, 0089), since it has been held that where the general conditions of a claim are disclosed in the prior art, discovering the optimum or working range involves only routine skill in the art. In re Aller, 105 USPQ 233.
Claim(s) 14-15 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Zhong et al. (See translation of CN 209233997 U) in view of Chen et al. (See translation of CN-110104990-A).
Regarding Claim 14, Zhong et al. (CN 209233997 U) discloses a device capable of reducing wind noise, comprising an external sound channel, a material, and a pickup hole, wherein the material is arranged between the external sound channel and the pickup hole; environmental wind can enter the device via the external sound channel, contact the material, and then reach the pickup hole (Device of Fig. 1-2 with air entering external channel 11, porous material 25, pickup hole 31, and porous material 25 between 11 and 31; Para. 0018-0019).
Zhong et al. fails to explicitly disclose the material (11; Fig. 2) as a zeolite material. However, Chen et al. (CN-110104990-A) teaches zeolite material (Chen: Sound absorbing material 32 filled in internal sound channel 12; Para. 0115; Fig. 2. Material 32 comprises porous zeolite; Para. 0128). Chen et al. and Zhong et al. are in similar fields of noise reduction within electronic devices. Modifying Zhong et al. with teachings of Chen et al. would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention wherein the material is a zeolite material for the purpose of zeolite being a typical used porous sound absorbing powder, since it has been held to be within the general skill of a worker in the art to select a known material on the basis of its suitability for the intended use as a matter of obvious design choice. In re Leshin, 125 USPQ 416.
Regarding Claim 15, Zhong et al. as modified by Chen et al. discloses the device according to claim 14, wherein the device is further provided with an internal sound channel, wherein the pickup hole, the internal sound channel, and the external sound channel communicates in this order, and the zeolite material is filled in the internal sound channel (Internal sound channel 21-23 with pickup hole 31, 23-26, and 11 communicating in order with Chen’s zeolite in place of 25; Fig. 2).
Claim(s) 16 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Zhong et al. (CN 209233997 U) in view of Chen et al. (CN-110104990-A) and Liu et al. (See translation of CN-102390843-A).
Regarding Claim 16 Zhong et al. as modified by Chen et al. discloses the device according to claim 14, wherein the zeolite material (Chen: Sound absorbing material 32 comprises porous zeolite; Para. 0128) comprises one or a combination of two or more of an MFI structure molecular sieve, an FER structure molecular sieve, a CHA structure molecular sieve, an MEL structure molecular sieve, a TON structure molecular sieve, an MTT structure molecular sieve, and a ZSM-5 molecular sieve (Chen: zeolite ZSM-5 is a molecular sieve; Para. 0079);
the particle size of the zeolite material is 0.5 μm to 10 μm (Chen: Less than μm and preferably less than 2 μm; Para. 0075).
Zhong et al. as modified by Chen et al. fails to explicitly disclose the following: the zeolite material comprises micropores with a pore size of 0.3 nm to 0.7 nm and mesopores with a pore size of 10 nm to 30 nm; the pore volume of the mesopores of the zeolite material is 20% to 45% of the total pore volume of the zeolite material; the pore volume of the mesopores of the zeolite material is 25% to 35% of the total pore volume of the zeolite material. However, he zeolite material comprises micropores with a pore size of 0.3 nm to 0.7 nm and mesopores with a pore size of 10 nm to 30 nm; the pore volume of the mesopores of the zeolite material is 20% to 45% of the total pore volume of the zeolite material; the pore volume of the mesopores of the zeolite material is 25% to 35% of the total pore volume of the zeolite material.
However, Liu et al. (CN-102390843-A) teaches the zeolite material comprises micropores with a pore size of 0.3 nm to 0.7 nm and mesopores with a pore size of 10 nm to 30 nm (Liu: Zeolite with micropore size 0.2nm-2nm and mesopore size between 2-30nm; Para. 0014). Liu et al. and Chen et al. are in similar fields comprising zeolites. Modifying Zhong et al. as modified by Chen et al. with teachings of Liu et al. would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention wherein the zeolite material comprises micropores with a pore size of 0.3 nm to 0.7 nm and mesopores with a pore size of 10 nm to 30 nm for the purpose of increasing interconnectedness with a multi-level zeolite structure for improving mass transfer and reaction rates (Liu: Para. 0026).
Zhong et al. as modified by Chen et al. and Liu et al. fails to explicitly disclose the pore volume of the mesopores of the zeolite material is 20% to 45% of the total pore volume of the zeolite material; the pore volume of the mesopores of the zeolite material is 25% to 35% of the total pore volume of the zeolite material. However, this would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention for the purpose of optimizing catalytic conversion rates of the zeolite (Liu: Para. 0026), since it has been held that where the general conditions of a claim are disclosed in the prior art, discovering the optimum or working range involves only routine skill in the art. In re Aller, 105 USPQ 233.
Claim(s) 17 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Zhong et al. (CN 209233997 U) in view of Chen et al. (CN-110104990-A) and De Pooter et al. (US 8,009,851).
Regarding Claim 17, Zhong et al. as modified by Chen et al. discloses the device according to claim 15, wherein the device further comprises an cover (Cover 1), and the external sound channel is arranged inside the arc cover along the horizontal direction of the cover (Cover 1 with external sound channel 11 along inside horizontal; Fig. 2).
Zhong et al. as modified by Chen et al. fails to explicitly disclose the cover (1) as an arc cover; the external sound channel (11; Fig. 2) has a pinwheel-like structure as a whole, including a central cavity and several branch channels arranged in a radial pattern around the central cavity, wherein the central cavity communicates with the internal sound channel, and each branch channel is a streamlined arc structure; the branch channels of the external sound channel are evenly distributed around the central cavity.
However, De Pooter et al. (US 8,009,851) teaches the cover as an arc cover (Body A with arc cover 26; Examiner Annotated De Pooter Fig. 9); the external sound channel has a structure as a whole, including a central cavity and several branch channels arranged in a radial pattern around the central cavity, wherein the central cavity communicates with the internal sound channel; the branch channels of the external sound channel are evenly distributed around the central cavity (Examiner Annotated De Pooter Fig. 9: Body A with arc cover 26. External sound channel with central cavity 24 and branch channels 28 radial about central cavity 24 wherein 24 communicates with internal sound channel 44; leading portion of branch channel 28 may be provided at ninety degrees/horizontal to axis A2; Col. 8, Lines 1-26; Fig. 10. Branch channels 28 described as “substantially symmetric about axis A2” with central cavity 24 also symmetric about A2; Col. 8, Lines 25-40).
De Pooter et al., Chen et al., and Zhong et al. are in similar fields of noise reduction within electronic devices. Modifying Zhong et al. and Chen et al. with teachings of De Pooter et al. would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention wherein the cover as an arc cover, since it has been held by the courts that a change in shape or configuration, without any criticality, is nothing more than one of numerous shapes that one of ordinary skill in the art will find obvious to provide based on the suitability for the intended final application. See In re Dailey, 149 USPQ 47 (CCPA 1976). It appears that the disclosed device would perform equally well shaped as disclosed by De Pooter et al. Modifying Zhong et al. and Chen et al. with teachings of De Pooter et al. would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention wherein the external sound channel has a structure as a whole, including a central cavity and several branch channels arranged in a radial pattern around the central cavity, wherein the central cavity communicates with the internal sound channel; the branch channels of the external sound channel are evenly distributed around the central cavity for the purpose of increasing the effective length traveled of both sound and air to reduce noise (De Pooter: Col. 8, Lines 20-30).
Zhong et al. as modified by Chen et al. and De Pooter et al. fail to explicitly disclose the external sound channel (External sound channel with central cavity 24 and branch channels 28; Fig. 9) has a pinwheel-like structure as a whole, and each branch channel is a streamlined arc structure. However, this would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, since it has been held by the courts that a change in shape or configuration, without any criticality, is nothing more than one of numerous shapes that one of ordinary skill in the art will find obvious to provide based on the suitability for the intended final application. See In re Dailey, 149 USPQ 47 (CCPA 1976). It appears that the disclosed device would perform equally well shaped as disclosed by De Pooter al.
Claim(s) 18-19 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Zhong et al. (CN 209233997 U) in view of Chen et al. (CN-110104990-A) and Lu et a. (See translation of WO 2022/048395 A1).
Regarding Claim 18, Zhong et al. as modified by Chen et al. discloses the device according to any one of claim 14. Zhong et al. as modified by Chen et al. fails to explicitly disclose wherein the device further comprises a PCB board; and the pickup hole (31; Fig. 2) is arranged at the center of the PCB board. However, Lu et al. (WO 2022/048395 A1) teaches a PCB board; and pickup hole arranged at the center of the PCB board (Lu: Center of PCB board 5 with pickup hole 2522 communicates with internal sound channel 2521; Para. 0069,0071 Fig. 4). Lu et al., Chen et al. and Zhong et al. are in similar fields comprising noise reducing headsets. Modifying Zhong et al. as modified by Chen et al. with teachings of Lu et al. would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skilled in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention wherein the device further comprises a PCB board; and the pickup hole is arranged at the center of the PCB board for the purpose of providing an interconnection function between components within the device while saving space (Lu: Para. 0088-0089).
Regarding Claim 19, Zhong et al. as modified by Chen et al. discloses the device according to any one of claim 14, wherein the device further comprises a body, wherein one end of the body is connected to a board , and the other end is connected to a cover, and an internal sound channel is arranged inside the body along the central axis of the body (Body 2 with one end connected to board 3 and cover 1; Internal sound channel 21-23 inside body 2; Fig. 2);
the diameter of the port of the internal sound channel on the side close to the board is greater than or equal to the diameter of the pickup hole (Diameter of 24 close to 3 is greater than 31; Para. 0018).
Zhong et al. as modified by Chen et al. fails to explicitly disclose the board (3) as a PCB board; cover (1) as an arc cover; the body (2) is a tubular structure; the diameter of the port of the internal sound channel on the side close to the external sound channel (Diameter of 21 close to 11) matches the diameter of a central cavity (22).
However, Lu et al. (WO 2022/048395 A1) teaches a PCB board; an arc cover; the body is a tubular structure; the diameter of the port of the internal sound channel on the side close to the external sound channel matches the diameter of a central cavity (Lu: PCB board 5, arc cover 24 and tubular body 23 are connected to form a cylindrical prism, diameter of port ; Para. 0072,0094; Fig. 5-6. ). Lu et al., Chen et al., and Zhong et al. are in similar fields of noise reduction within electronic devices. Modifying Zhong et al. as modified by Chen et al. with teachings of Lu et al. would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention wherein a PCB board for the purpose of providing power to the device (Lu: Para. 0089); an arc cover and the body is a tubular structure, since it has been held by the courts that a change in shape or configuration, without any criticality, is nothing more than one of numerous shapes that one of ordinary skill in the art will find obvious to provide based on the suitability for the intended final application. See In re Dailey, 149 USPQ 47 (CCPA 1976). It appears that the disclosed device would perform equally well shaped as disclosed by Lu et al.
Modifying Zhong et al. as modified by Chen et al. and Lu et al. fails to explicitly disclose the diameter of the port of the internal sound channel on the side close to the external sound channel matches the diameter of a central cavity. However, this would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention for the purpose of optimizing flow resistance through the device, since it has been held that discovering the optimum value of a result effective variable involves only routine skill in the Art. In re Boesch, 617 F.2d 272, 205 USPQ 215 (CCPA 1980).
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure: US-3238056-A, US-8358799-B1, US-9674596-B2, US-8631899-B2, US-9820023-B2, CN-107046665-A, CN-107426646-A
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JENNIFER B OLSON whose telephone number is (571)272-3041. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday, 8:00am -4:00pm.
Examiner interviews are available via telephone, in-person, and video conferencing using a USPTO supplied web-based collaboration tool. To schedule an interview, applicant is encouraged to use the USPTO Automated Interview Request (AIR) at http://www.uspto.gov/interviewpractice.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Dedei Hammond can be reached at (571)270-7938. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of published or unpublished applications may be obtained from Patent Center. Unpublished application information in Patent Center is available to registered users. To file and manage patent submissions in Patent Center, visit: https://patentcenter.uspto.gov. Visit https://www.uspto.gov/patents/apply/patent-center for more information about Patent Center and https://www.uspto.gov/patents/docx for information about filing in DOCX format. For additional questions, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/JENNIFER B OLSON/Examiner, Art Unit 2837
/DEDEI K HAMMOND/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2837
Prosecution Insights